Thompson and the Cavaliers had reached an agreement early in free agency that was believed to have been centered on a five-year deal worth some $80 million. The problem with doing a deal at that number is that virtually everyone in Thompson’s talent range got substantially more, most receiving the NBA maximum salary, some for less years, but most for the same year one dollar amount.

Thompson’s camp pulled back from the $80 million number, wanting the Cavs to step up with more based on what virtually everyone else in Thompson’s peer range got.

I’m not sure who Thompson considers his peers, but I place him solidly behind Marc Gasol, LaMarcus Aldridge, Kevin Love, DeAndre Jordan, Greg Monroe, Draymond Green, Brook Lopez, Paul Millsap and Tim Duncan in the next group of big-man free agents.

Does that warrant more than the $16 million per season the Cavaliers reportedly offered?

Thompson might think he’s in the same group as Monroe (three-year max contract) and Green (five years, $82 million), but he’s not as good as those two. They deserve to be paid more than Thompson.

But deserve has only so much to do with it.

Thompson holds major leverage. If he takes the qualifying offer and leaves next summer, the Cavaliers won’t have the cap flexibility to find a comparable replacement. They can sign Thompson only because they have his Bird rights. That won’t be the case with outside free agents.

The Thunder were in the same boat with Kanter, which is why they matched his max offer sheet from the Trail Blazers. Thompson should point to that situation for comparison. The Cavaliers, though, would probably tell Thompson to bring them an offer sheet, like Kanter did with Oklahoma City.

But Thompson has even more leverage. He shares an agent, Rich Paul, with LeBron James. Cleveland surely wants to keep LeBron happy, and LeBron wants Thompson back.

Thompson might get more than $80 million. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got his max ($94,343,125 over five years). It just won’t be because his on-court peers all got that much. The max-level free agents – with the exception of Kanter – are a class above in actual ability.

But that Kanter comparison works for Thompson, and he and Paul should hammer it until the Cavaliers relent. No need to bring up that Kanter signed well after Thompson’s talks with Cleveland broke down. This is only minimally a discussion about logic and production.

It’s mostly about leverage, and no matter what flawed viewpoints got us here, Thompson still has leverage.

So does his ability. Holyfield faces a steep increase in competition from the Southland Conference. His size advantage is much less pronounced in the NBA, and he has yet to show the skills necessary to handle it.

But Memphis could use a third center for insurance. Gasol is on the wrong side of 30. Wright, though healthy last season, played just 58, 64, 49, 37, 39 and 38 games in his other six NBA seasons. Zach Randolph could handle the position if pressed, but that’s not ideal.

It makes sense for the Grizzlies to waive Holyfield and assign his D-League rights to their affiliate, the Iowa Energy. It also makes sense for Memphis to find a third center, someone better than Holyfield. Until the latter happens, I wouldn’t consider the former a total lock.

Jackson thinks he might not be aggressive enough. “Also, if you look at the guys who came to the NBA from Duke, aside from Grant Hill, which ones lived up to expectations?”

Let’s take a comprehensive look rather than cherry-picking players who could support either side of the argument.

We obviously don’t know yet whether Okafor, Winslow and Tyus Jones (No. 24 this year) will live up to expectations. Jabari Parker (No. 2 in 2014) looked pretty good last year, but he missed most of the season due to injury. It’s far too soon to make any judgments on him.

Otherwise, here are all Duke players drafted in the previous 15 years:

Lived up to expectations

Rodney Hood (No. 23 in 2014)

Mason Plumlee (No. 22 in 2013)

Ryan Kelly (No. 48 in 2013)

Miles Plumlee (No. 26 in 2012)

Kyrie Irving (No. 1 in 2011)

Kyle Singler (No. 33 in 2011)

Josh McRoberts (No. 37 in 2007)

J.J. Redick (No. 11 in 2006)

Luol Deng (No. 7 in 2004)

Chris Duhon (No. 38 in 2004)

Carlos Boozer (No. 34 in 2002)

Shane Battier (No. 6 in 2001)

Didn’t live up to expectations

Austin Rivers (No. 10 in 2012)

Nolan Smith (No. 21 in 2011)

Gerald Henderson (No. 12 in 2009)

Shelden Williams (No. 5 in 2006)

Daniel Ewing (No. 32 in 2005)

Dahntay Jones (No. 20 in 2003)

Mike Dunleavy (No. 3 in 2002)

Jay Williams (No. 2 in 2002)

Chris Carrawell (No. 41 in 2000)

That’s 12-of-21 – a 57 percent hit rate.

By comparison, here are players drafted from North Carolina in the same span:

Lived up to expectations

Harrison Barnes (No. 7 in 2012)

John Henson (No. 14 in 2012)

Tyler Zeller (No. 17 in 2012)

Ed Davis (No. 13 in 2010)

Tyler Hansbrough (No. 13 in 2009)

Ty Lawson (No. 18 in 2009)

Wayne Ellington (No. 28 in 2009)

Danny Green (No. 46 in 2009)

Brandan Wright (No. 8 in 2007)

Brendan Haywood (No. 20 in 2001)

Didn’t live up to expectations

Reggie Bullock (No. 25 in 2013)

Kendall Marshall (No. 13 in 2012)

Reyshawn Terry (No. 44 in 2007)

David Noel (No. 39 in 2006)

Marvin Williams (No. 2 in 2005)

Raymond Felton (No. 5 in 2005)

Sean May (No. 13 in 2005)

Rashad McCants (No. 14 in 2005)

Joseph Forte (No. 21 in 2001)

The Tar Heels are 10-for-19 – 53 percent.

Nobody would reasonably shy from drafting players from North Carolina, and they’ve fared worse than Duke players. Making snap judgments about Duke players just because they went to Duke is foolish.

Jackson is talking about a different time, when aside from Hill, Duke had a long run of first-round picks failing to meet expectations:

Roshown McLeod (No. 20 in 1998)

Cherokee Parks (No. 12 in 1995)

Bobby Hurley (No. 7 in 1993)

Christian Laettner (No. 3 in 1992)

Alaa Abdelnaby (No. 25 in 1990)

Danny Ferry (No. 2 in 1989)

Then, it was fair to question whether Mike Krzyzewski’s coaching yielded good college players who didn’t translate to the pros. But there have been more than enough counterexamples in the years since to dismiss that theory as bunk or outdated.

The NBA’s practice of allowing more than a week of negotiations between players and teams before anyone can actually put pen to paper to sign a deal has never gotten more scrutiny, thanks to DeAndre Jordan and his house guests. There could be changes in the future.

But the system wasn’t changing this year, and that moratorium ended when the calendar flipped from July 8 to 9 (Eastern time). Here is a list of who we know signed with teams immediately after midnight. There may be more, and the majority of players will sign later in the day (and have press conferences where they will talk to the media), but here is the list as we have it now (in no particular order):

Baynes is coming off a career year, averaging 6.6 points and 4.5 rebounds in 16.0 minutes per game. He can make mid-range jumpers, and he rebounds well. He’ll be a solid backup center to Andre Drummond.

But Baynes is already 28 and not very athletic. It’s hard to see much upside. Plus, he probably benefited from the Spurs’ system in ways he won’t in Detroit.